Valuing Companies with Cash‐Flow@Risk

The classic DCF approach to capital budgeting—the one that MBA students in the world's top business schools have been taught for the last 30 years—begins with the assumption that the corporate investment decision is “independent of” the financing decision. That is, the value of a given investment opportunity should not be affected by how a company is financed, whether mainly with debt or with equity. A corollary of this capital structure “irrelevance” proposition says that a company's investment decision should also not be influenced by its risk management policy—by whether a company hedges its various price exposures or chooses to leave them unhedged. In this article, the authors—one of whom is the CFO of the French high‐tech firm Gemalto—propose a practical alternative to DCF that is based on a concept they call “cash‐flow@risk.” Implementation of the concept involves dividing expected future cash flow into two components: a low‐risk part, or “certainty equivalent,” and a high‐risk part. The two cash flow streams are discounted at different rates (corresponding to debt and equity) when estimating their value. The concept of cash‐flow@risk derives directly from, and is fully consistent with, the concept of economic capital that was developed by Robert Merton and Andre Perold in the early 1990s and that has become the basis of Value at Risk (or VaR) capital allocation systems now used at most financial institutions. But because the approach in this article focuses on the volatility of operating cash flows instead of asset values, the authors argue that an internal capital allocation system based on cash‐flow@risk is likely to be much more suitable than VaR for industrial companies.     

Factors affecting biasing of capital budgeting cash flow forecasts: evidence from the hotel industry

This study contributes to a neglected aspect of the capital budgeting process, namely, the proposal development stage, which is primarily concerned with project cash flow estimation. Given that the deployment of sophisticated selection techniques is severely undermined when directed to input data suffering from bias, it is surprising that minimal empirical research has sought to explore for antecedent factors associated with biasing of capital budgeting cash flow forecasts. This paper reports the findings of a survey concerned with determining factors associated with biasing of capital budget cash flow forecasts in hotels that are mediated by a management contract. Statistically significant support is provided for the view that higher levels of biasing of capital budget cash flow forecasts occur in the presence of: high emphasis attached to the payback investment appraisal method; deficient reserve funds for furniture, fittings, and equipment (FF&E); low operator accessibility to reserve funds for FF&E; shorter periods of time to management contract expiry; and high emphasis attached to non-financial factors in capital budgeting appraisal.     

Capital Project Analysis When Cash Flows Evolve as a Continuous Time Branching Process

Optimal capital budgeting criteria now exist for a variety of applications when project cash flows (or present values) evolve in terms of the well-known geometric Brownian motion. However, relatively little is known about the capital budgeting procedures that ought to be implemented when cash flows are generated by stochastic processes other than the geometric Brownian motion. Given this, our purpose here is to develop optimal investment criteria for capital projects with cash flows that evolve in terms of a continuous time branching process. Branching processes are compatible with an empirical phenomenon known as 'volatility smile'. This occurs when there are systematic fluctuations in the implied volatility of a capital project's cash flows as the cash flow grows in magnitude. A number of studies have shown that this phenomenon characterizes the cash flow streams of the capital projects in which firms typically invest. We implement optimal capital budgeting procedures for both the continuous time branching process and the geometric Brownian motion using cost and revenue data for the Stuart oil shale project in central Queensland, Australia. This example shows that significant differences can arise between the optimal investment criteria for cash flows based on a branching process and those based on the geometric Brownian motion. This underscores the need for the geometric Brownian motion broadly to reflect the way a given capital project's cash flows actually evolve if serious errors in valuation and/or capital budgeting decisions are to be avoided.     

The Role of Real Options in Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice1

Most discussions of capital budgeting take for granted that discounted cash flow (DCF) and real options valuation (ROV) are very different methods that are meant to be applied in different circumstances. Such discussions also typically assume that DCF is “easy” and ROV is “hard”—or at least dauntingly unfamiliar—and that, mainly for this reason, managers often use DCF and rarely ROV. This paper argues that all three assumptions are wrong or at least seriously misleading. DCF and ROV both assign a present value to risky future cash flows. DCF entails discounting expected future cash flows at the expected return on an asset of comparable risk. ROV uses “risk‐neutral” valuation, which means computing expected cash flows based on “risk‐neutral” probabilities and discounting these flows at the risk‐free rate. Using a series of single‐period examples, the author demonstrates that both methods, when done correctly, should provide the same answer. Moreover, in most ROV applications—those where there is no forward price or “replicating portfolio” of traded assets—a “preliminary” DCF valuation is required to perform the risk‐neutral valuation. So why use ROV at all? In cases where project risk and the discount rates are expected to change over time, the risk‐neutral ROV approach will be easier to implement than DCF (since adjusting cash flow probabilities is more straightforward than adjusting discount rates). The author uses multi‐period examples to illustrate further both the simplicity of ROV and the strong assumptions required for a typical DCF valuation. But the simplicity that results from discounting with risk‐free rates is not the only benefit of using ROV instead of—or together with—traditional DCF. The use of formal ROV techniques may also encourage managers to think more broadly about the flexibility that is (or can be) built into future business decisions, and thus to choose from a different set of possible investments. To the extent that managers who use ROV have effectively adopted a different business model, there is a real and important difference between the two valuation techniques. Consistent with this possibility, much of the evidence from both surveys and academic studies of managerial behavior and market pricing suggests that managers and investors implicitly take account of real options when making investment decisions.     

Intertemporal capital budgeting

This paper analyzes the optimal capital budgeting mechanism when divisional managers are privately informed about the arrival of future investment projects. Consistent with field study evidence, an optimal allocation mechanism can include a stipulation that a capital request for discretionary investment will be declined with positive probability in the period after a significant investment was made even though this is ex post suboptimal. The model derives a number of empirical predictions regarding capital budgeting and the investment of financially constrained firms.     

The Role of Payback in the Investment Process

This study examines the use of the payback (PB) method as a means of evaluating a proposed asset's risk and its joint application with profit-oriented capital budgeting models. Previous research studies indicating a linkage between the PB method and risk analysis are reviewed. A certainty-equivalent model is used to demonstrate this relationship and the properties of the relationship exploited by PB when used as a heuristic. Results of the analysis indicate that using a hurdle PB as a filter for identifying proposals with acceptable risk and return attributes is consistent with more quantitatively oriented investment techniques under certain conditions. The study then examines the conceptual relationship between PB and profit-oriented capital budgeting models. Results suggest that PB and profit-oriented capital budgeting techniques measure different attributes of an investment and complement one another in describing and analysing its cash flows.     

Financing constraints and internal capital markets: Evidence from Korean `chaebols'

We compare the investment–cash flow sensitivity of Korean chaebols (conglomerates) and non-chaebol firms. We show that investment–cash flow sensitivity is low and insignificant for chaebol firms but is high and significant for non-chaebol firms. On the other hand, a chaebol firm's investment is significantly related to the growth opportunities but that of a non-chaebol firm is not. A chaebol firm's investment is significantly affected by the cash flow of other firms within the same chaebol even though they are independent legal entities. With these findings, we argue that there is an internal capital market in a chaebol and the internal capital market reduces the financing constraints of the chaebol. However, the operation of the internal capital market does not improve the efficiency of allocation of scarce funds in the Korean economy since we find that chaebols invest more than non-chaebol firms despite their relatively poor growth opportunities.     

The Asymptotic Optimality of Residual Income Maximization

Residual income subtracts from operating income an interest charge for invested capital. Residual income can be calculated each period from current accounting information, unlike discounted cash flow (DCF), which requires the knowledge of future cash flows. This paper provides a normative justification for residual-income maximization by showing that if investment decisions are made myopically each period to maximize residual income, the resulting path asymptotically maximizes discounted cash flow. Thus, under the assumptions of the model, residual-income maximization is a heuristic that leads to the long-run DCF-optimum.     

THE DETERMINATION AND USE OF INVESTMENT HURDLE RATES IN CAPITAL BUGETING: A SURVEY OF AUSTRALIAN PRACTICE*

This paper summarizes the results of a survey, conducted in 1979, which investigated Australian practice in the determination and use of investment hurdle rates, and in certain other areas of capital budgeting which impinge on hurdle rate practice. The study suggests a significant closure of the gap between theory and practice in capital budgeting in terms of the use of discounted cash flow techniques of capital project evaluation, and in terms of the use of some tools of finance such as the weighted average cost of capital. However, many developments in the determination and use of investment hurdle rates appear to have taken place at a slower rate, and it is possible that some “back-tracking” may be required in order to improve practice.     

How Fundamental are Fundamental Values? Valuation Methods and their Impact on the Performance of German Venture Capitalists

This paper studies how the use of alternative valuation methodologies affects investment performance for a sample of 53 German venture capitalists. We measure investment performance by the amount of investments they need to write off and by the number of companies they take public. We find that a significant number of investment managers use discounted cash flow (DCF) techniques, but only a minority appears to use a discount rate related to the cost of capital. The majority applies DCF using subjective discount rates. We present evidence that the use of DCF is correlated with superior investment performance only if applied in conjunction with an objectifiable discount rate. Also, funds that invest with a longer horizon perform better. The use of multiples is not significantly correlated with investment performance. We conclude that a focus on fundamental values confers an advantage.     

Beyond Panglossian theory: strategic capital investing in a complex adaptive world

Traditional capital budgeting theory (as an extension of financial economics) is characterized as Panglossian because of its suggestion that rational market outcomes produce the best of all possible worlds. During the last two decades, practice-oriented theorists have increasingly been moving from algorithmic capital budgeting techniques to a focus on capital investment strategy. Also, during the last twelve years, economics researchers at the Santa Fe Institute (SFI) have scrapped the dubious assumptions of neoclassical economics and have turned to complex adaptive systems theory for a more realistic portrayal of the economy. This paper explores various SFI studies and their implications for capital investment theory and capital investment strategy. Brian Arthur's theory of increasing returns undermines the notion that capital budgeting techniques can be counted on to generate economic efficiency. His theory further suggests that the high tech, knowledge-based sectors of the economy inherently produce outcomes that are too unpredictable for the meaningful application of traditional capital budgeting techniques. Studies by David Lane and his colleagues suggest that the identity of agents, the attributes of artifacts and the possibilities for action tend to be emergent phenomena that are generated by the interactions of agents. These considerations suggest a form of strategic action that focuses on process. Finally, it is argued that the artificial life and other SFI types of computer simulation models are potentially useful tools for the study of strategic capital investment decisions.     

Corporate capital budgeting and CEO turnover

When a firm has minimal agency and informational asymmetry problems it should make efficient capital budgeting decisions. Many firms over-invest prior to CEO turnover, halt investments in the period surrounding the turnover, and then greatly increase their level of expenditures. Empirical analysis of the cross-sectional and inter-temporal variation in the quality of firms' corporate capital budgeting decision reveals that the impact of CEO turnover is asymmetric between under- and over-investing firms, and this complements the larger literature using average firm-wide performance measures. Firms are more likely to have forced turnovers when there is more over-investment prior to the turnover, and these firms make more efficient investment decisions subsequently. Board influence is largely insignificant prior to a CEO turnover but is consistently associated with higher levels of investment subsequently.     

A positive analysis of corporate capital budgeting practices

Although the academic literature has long argued that discounted cash flow methods are superior to other capital budgeting rules, these methods have only fairly recently come into widespread use. This article points out that there are both costs and benefits to using discounting rules such as net present value. Therefore, they may often not work better in practice than nondiscounting methods. Empirically, the use of discounting methods is positively correlated with market interest rates and the dissemination of information about these tools and negatively correlated with the degree of uncertainty in the economy, which is consistent with our hypotheses.     

Investment and financing constraints in China: Does working capital management make a difference?

We use a panel of over 116,000 Chinese firms of different ownership types over the period 2000–2007 to analyze the linkages between investment in fixed and working capital and financing constraints. We find that those firms characterized by high working capital display high sensitivities of investment in working capital to cash flow (WKS) and low sensitivities of investment in fixed capital to cash flow (FKS). We then construct and analyze firm-level FKS and WKS measures and find that, despite severe external financing constraints, those firms with low FKS and high WKS exhibit the highest fixed investment rates. This suggests that an active management of working capital may help firms to alleviate the effects of financing constraints on fixed investment.     

Capital Structure, Information Acquisition and Investment Decisions in an Industry Framework

This paper analyzes the relationship between a firm's capital structure and its information acquisition prior to capital budgeting decisions. It is found that low-growth industries can sustain a large number of levered firms. In these industries, leverage is negatively related to a firm's incentive to acquire information during the capital budgeting process. In contrast, high-growth industries only sustain a small number of levered firms. In these industries, levered firms acquire more information than all-equity financed firms. The model yields empirical predictions regarding the effects of leverage on the expected amount and the volatility of corporate investment. While leverage does not affect firm value, highly levered firms generate a more volatile cash flow than firms with low debt levels.     

The evolution of the application of capital budgeting techniques in enterprises

This study examines the evolution of the application of capital budgeting techniques. Previous studies mostly used cross-sectional inquiries to understand the capital budgeting practices of firms. Only a few researchers have undertaken longitudinal studies to generalise the findings of the individual cross-sectional studies to the wider population and to identify the emerging trends in the use of capital budgeting techniques (CBTs). This longitudinal study surveys 83 studies of capital budgeting practices across firms in India, South Africa, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA) for the period from 1966 to 2016. The findings show that six capital budgeting techniques, namely, the net present value (NPV), the internal rate of return (IRR), the payback period (PBP), the accounting rate of return (ARR), the return on investment (ROI) and the real option valuation (ROV), are the most popular methods for evaluating capital investments. Of these techniques, the ROV is the least used, and a general lack of familiarity with this technique and its complexity are the most commonly cited reasons for not using it. Another method that is used less than the first four techniques is the ROI. However, this technique is of growing significance and is mainly used in the UK, followed by the USA, South Africa, and India. Firms in the USA and UK have increased their use of the IRR as a primary method for evaluating capital projects and have retained the PBP as an ancillary technique to strengthen the available information when evaluating capital projects. Firms in India and South Africa are increasingly excluding both the PBP and ARR methods and are increasingly using the NPV when evaluating capital investments. Although this development is in line with the theory, it limits the scope of the available information when evaluating capital projects.     

Making real options really work

As a way to value growth opportunities, real options have had a difficult time catching on with managers. Many CFOs believe the method ensures the overvaluation of risky projects. This concern is legitimate, but abandoning real options as a valuation model isn't the solution. Companies that rely solely on discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis underestimate the value of their projects and may fail to invest enough in uncertain but highly promising opportunities. CFOs need not--and should not--choose one approach over the other. Far from being a replacement for DCF analysis, real options are an essential complement, and a project's total value should encompass both. DCF captures a base estimate of value; real options take into account the potential for big gains. This is not to say that there aren't problems with real options. As currently applied, they focus almost exclusively on the risks associated with revenues, ignoring the risks associated with a project's costs. It's also true that option valuations almost always ignore assets that an initial investment in a subsequently abandoned project will often leave the company. In this article, the authors present a simple formula for combining DCF and option valuations that addresses these two problems. Using an integrated approach, managers will, in the long run, select better projects than their more timid competitors while keeping risk under control. Thus, they will outperform their rivals in both the product and the capital markets.     

A generalized coherent risk measure: The firm's perspective

This note extends the concept of a coherent risk measure to make it more consistent with a firm's capital budgeting perspective. A coherent risk measure defines the risk of a portfolio to be that amount of cash that must be added to the portfolio such that it becomes acceptable to a regulator. As such, a coherent risk measure implicitly assumes that the firm has already made its capital budgeting decision. Except for a cash infusion, the portfolio composition remains unchanged. We propose a generalized version of a coherent risk measure that also allows the portfolio composition to change as well. Once the investment decisions are fixed, our measure collapses to a coherent risk measure.     

The odd notion of “reversible investment”

Irreversible investment and the attendant concept of real-option value have been well discussed. Complete reversibility has been frequently invoked but less studied, especially for the case of lumpy investment typically considered in capital budgeting. We examine a simple lumpy investment problem for the full range, from complete irreversibility to completely reversibility, with a focus on the latter. The optimal stopping rules under complete reversibility are to invest when the project generates enough net cash flow to cover Jorgenson’s opportunity cost of investment and to disinvest when it does not. Given the static nature of these rules, net present value as a timing criterion under reversibility is not pertinent. Investments that are partially reversible have much in common with completely irreversible investments but nothing in common with completely reversible investments. The case of reversible investment provides a foil for understanding that the distinguishing feature of investment as treated in corporate finance is that it entails at least some irreversibility.     

Corporate taxes,capital structure,and valuation: Combining Modigliani/Miller and Miles/Ezzell

The valuation of a firm with discounted cash flow (DCF) approaches requires assumptions about the firm’s financing strategy. The approaches of Modigliani and Miller and Miles and Ezzell assume that either a passive debt management with predetermined debt levels or active debt management with capital structure targets is applied. Over the last decades, various extensions of these approaches have been developed to allow for a more realistic depiction of financial decision making. However, recent empirical analyses indicate that current theories still have limited power to explain large variances in capital structure across time. We provide an alternative explanation for the empirical observation by assuming that firms combine both capital structure targets and predetermined debt within future periods, and we show how to value a firm given such a partially active debt management. The approaches of Modigliani and Miller and Miles and Ezzell are embedded into a common valuation framework, with the familiar valuation formulas shown as special cases. In a simulation analysis, we illustrate that the textbook valuation formulas may produce considerable valuation errors if a firm applies a partially active debt management.